Which implant is better for beginners to learn to treat geriatric intertrochanteric femur fractures: A randomised controlled trial of surgeons, metalwork, and patients

Clicks: 466
ID: 258305
2020
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #1 of 4 articles by views in Journal of orthopaedic translation

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Background: We wondered whether the third-generation gamma nail-3 (GN-3) was better for junior surgeons to learn to treat geriatric intertrochanteric femur fractures than proximal femoral nail antirotation-II (PFNA-II). Methods: This is a prospective randomised study of 350 patients who underwent GN-3 fixation and PFNA-II carried out by junior orthopaedic trauma surgeons from January 2011 February 2017. We compared nail positioning, complication rates, operative and fluoroscopy time, blood transfused, time to mobilisation, hospital stay, fracture union, mismatch, mortality and postoperative outcomes. The minimum follow-up was 12 months (mean, 27.2 months; range, 12–42 months). Results: The recovery rate of the GN-3 group was higher than that of the PFNA-II group significantly. Compared with the PFNA-II group, the GN-3 group was superior in fracture gap, while operative time, fluoroscopy time, blood transfused, time to mobilisation, hospital stay, Harris Hip Score, reoperation, mortality and so on had no significant difference between two groups. There were five cases with cutout through the femoral neck in the GN-3 group, whereas in the PFNA-II group, we only had two cases with significant difference. The area of match in the GN-3 group conformed to that of the femur of Asian population better than that in the PFNA-II group. Conclusions: PFNA-II and GN-3 internal fixation are both effective methods for junior orthopaedic trauma surgeons to treat femoral intertrochanteric fracture. But our study reveals better results of the GN-3 group over the PFNA-II group on recovery rate. There is a high rate of cutout in patients treated with the GN-3, especially for those with bone defect or serious osteoporosis. The translational potential of this article: The results of this work have the potential to improve the cognition of geriatric intertrochanteric femur fractures for junior surgeons, supplying the theoretical basis for the selection and comparison of Intramedullary nail. Such a guidance will allow better healing, fewer complications, and ultimately improved outcomes. Keywords: Complications, Gamma nail-3, Geriatric intertrochanteric femur fractures, Junior surgeons, Proximal femoral nail antirotation-II, Recovery
Reference Key
wu2020whichjournal Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors
Journal Journal of orthopaedic translation
Year 2020
DOI
10.1016/j.jot.2019.11.003
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.